轮子取代金字塔:更好地代表循证医学的整体范式。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Annals of Global Health Pub Date : 2024-02-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5334/aogh.4341
Colleen Aldous, Barry M Dancis, Jerome Dancis, Philip R Oldfield
{"title":"轮子取代金字塔:更好地代表循证医学的整体范式。","authors":"Colleen Aldous, Barry M Dancis, Jerome Dancis, Philip R Oldfield","doi":"10.5334/aogh.4341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence-based medicine (EBM), as originally conceived, used all types of peer-reviewed evidence to guide medical practice and decision-making. During the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the standard usage of EBM, modeled by the Evidence-Based Medicine Pyramid, undermined EBM by incorrectly using pyramid levels to assign relative quality. The resulting pyramid-based thinking is biased against reports both in levels beneath randomized control trials (RCTs) and those omitted from the pyramid entirely. Thus, much of the evidence was ignored. Our desire for a more encompassing and effective medical decision-making process to apply to repurposed drugs led us to develop an alternative to the EBM Pyramid for EBM. Herein, we propose the totality of evidence (T-EBM) wheel.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To create an easily understood graphic that models EBM by incorporating all peer-reviewed evidence that applies to both new and repurposed medicines, and to demonstrate its potential utility using ivermectin as a case study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The graphics were produced using Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2003 except for part of the T-EBM wheel sunburst chart, which was produced using Microsoft 365 Excel. For the case study, PubMed® was used by searching for peer-reviewed reports containing \"ivermectin\" and either \"covid\" or \"sars\" in the title. Reports were filtered for those using ivermectin-based protocols in the treatment of COVID-19. The resulting 265 reports were evaluated for their study design types and treatment outcomes. The three-ringed graphical T-EBM wheel was composed of two inner rings showing all types of reports and an outer ring showing outcomes for each type.</p><p><strong>Findings-conclusions: </strong>The T-EBM wheel avoids the biases of the EBM Pyramid and includes all types of reports in the pyramid along with reports such as population and mechanistic studies. In both early and late stages of medical emergencies, pyramid-based thinking may overlook indications of efficacy in regions of the T-EBM wheel beyond RCTs. This is especially true when searching for ways to prevent and treat a novel disease with repurposed therapeutics before RCTs, safety assessments, and mechanisms of action of novel therapeutics are established. As such, T-EBM Wheels should replace the EBM Pyramids in medical decision-making and education. T-EBM Wheels can be expanded upon by implementing multiple outer rings, one for each different kind of outcome (efficacy, safety, etc.). A T-EBM Wheel can be created for any proprietary or generic medicine. The ivermectin (IVM) T-EBM Wheel displays the efficacy of IVM-based treatments of COVID-19 in a color-coded graphic, visualizing each type of evidence and the proportions of each of their outcomes (positive, inconclusive, negative).</p>","PeriodicalId":48857,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Global Health","volume":"90 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10906340/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wheel Replacing Pyramid: Better Paradigm Representing Totality of Evidence-Based Medicine.\",\"authors\":\"Colleen Aldous, Barry M Dancis, Jerome Dancis, Philip R Oldfield\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/aogh.4341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence-based medicine (EBM), as originally conceived, used all types of peer-reviewed evidence to guide medical practice and decision-making. During the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the standard usage of EBM, modeled by the Evidence-Based Medicine Pyramid, undermined EBM by incorrectly using pyramid levels to assign relative quality. The resulting pyramid-based thinking is biased against reports both in levels beneath randomized control trials (RCTs) and those omitted from the pyramid entirely. Thus, much of the evidence was ignored. Our desire for a more encompassing and effective medical decision-making process to apply to repurposed drugs led us to develop an alternative to the EBM Pyramid for EBM. Herein, we propose the totality of evidence (T-EBM) wheel.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To create an easily understood graphic that models EBM by incorporating all peer-reviewed evidence that applies to both new and repurposed medicines, and to demonstrate its potential utility using ivermectin as a case study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The graphics were produced using Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2003 except for part of the T-EBM wheel sunburst chart, which was produced using Microsoft 365 Excel. For the case study, PubMed® was used by searching for peer-reviewed reports containing \\\"ivermectin\\\" and either \\\"covid\\\" or \\\"sars\\\" in the title. Reports were filtered for those using ivermectin-based protocols in the treatment of COVID-19. The resulting 265 reports were evaluated for their study design types and treatment outcomes. The three-ringed graphical T-EBM wheel was composed of two inner rings showing all types of reports and an outer ring showing outcomes for each type.</p><p><strong>Findings-conclusions: </strong>The T-EBM wheel avoids the biases of the EBM Pyramid and includes all types of reports in the pyramid along with reports such as population and mechanistic studies. In both early and late stages of medical emergencies, pyramid-based thinking may overlook indications of efficacy in regions of the T-EBM wheel beyond RCTs. This is especially true when searching for ways to prevent and treat a novel disease with repurposed therapeutics before RCTs, safety assessments, and mechanisms of action of novel therapeutics are established. As such, T-EBM Wheels should replace the EBM Pyramids in medical decision-making and education. T-EBM Wheels can be expanded upon by implementing multiple outer rings, one for each different kind of outcome (efficacy, safety, etc.). A T-EBM Wheel can be created for any proprietary or generic medicine. The ivermectin (IVM) T-EBM Wheel displays the efficacy of IVM-based treatments of COVID-19 in a color-coded graphic, visualizing each type of evidence and the proportions of each of their outcomes (positive, inconclusive, negative).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10906340/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4341\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4341","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:循证医学(EBM)的最初构想是利用所有类型的同行评审证据来指导医疗实践和决策。在 SARS-CoV-2 冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间,以循证医学金字塔为模型的 EBM 标准用法,由于错误地使用金字塔级别来分配相对质量,从而破坏了 EBM。由此产生的金字塔思维对低于随机对照试验(RCT)级别的报告和完全被金字塔遗漏的报告都存在偏见。因此,很多证据都被忽略了。我们希望有一个更全面、更有效的医疗决策过程来应用于再利用药物,这促使我们开发了一种替代 EBM 金字塔的 EBM 方法。在此,我们提出了全面证据(T-EBM)轮:创建一个易于理解的图形,通过纳入适用于新药和再用药的所有经同行评审的证据来建立 EBM 模型,并以伊维菌素作为案例研究来证明其潜在的实用性:除 T-EBM 轮状旭日图使用 Microsoft 365 Excel 制作外,其他图表均使用 Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2003 制作。案例研究使用 PubMed®,搜索标题中包含 "伊维菌素 "和 "covid "或 "sars "的同行评审报告。筛选出使用伊维菌素治疗 COVID-19 的报告。对筛选出的 265 篇报告的研究设计类型和治疗结果进行了评估。三环图形化 T-EBM 轮由两个内环和一个外环组成,内环显示所有类型的报告,外环显示每种类型的结果:T-EBM轮避免了EBM金字塔的偏差,将所有类型的报告以及人群和机理研究等报告都纳入了金字塔。在医疗急救的早期和晚期阶段,基于金字塔的思维可能会忽略 T-EBM 轮中 RCT 以外区域的疗效指标。在临床试验、安全性评估和新型疗法的作用机理尚未确定之前,利用重新定位的疗法寻找预防和治疗新型疾病的方法时,尤其如此。因此,在医学决策和教育中,"T-EBM 车轮 "应取代 "EBM 金字塔"。T-EBM 车轮可以通过实施多个外环进行扩展,每种不同的结果(疗效、安全性等)都有一个外环。可以为任何专利或非专利药品创建 T-EBM 车轮。伊维菌素(IVM)T-EBM 车轮以彩色编码图形显示基于 IVM 的 COVID-19 治疗方法的疗效,直观显示每种类型的证据及其每种结果(阳性、不确定、阴性)的比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Wheel Replacing Pyramid: Better Paradigm Representing Totality of Evidence-Based Medicine.

Background: Evidence-based medicine (EBM), as originally conceived, used all types of peer-reviewed evidence to guide medical practice and decision-making. During the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the standard usage of EBM, modeled by the Evidence-Based Medicine Pyramid, undermined EBM by incorrectly using pyramid levels to assign relative quality. The resulting pyramid-based thinking is biased against reports both in levels beneath randomized control trials (RCTs) and those omitted from the pyramid entirely. Thus, much of the evidence was ignored. Our desire for a more encompassing and effective medical decision-making process to apply to repurposed drugs led us to develop an alternative to the EBM Pyramid for EBM. Herein, we propose the totality of evidence (T-EBM) wheel.

Objectives: To create an easily understood graphic that models EBM by incorporating all peer-reviewed evidence that applies to both new and repurposed medicines, and to demonstrate its potential utility using ivermectin as a case study.

Methods: The graphics were produced using Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2003 except for part of the T-EBM wheel sunburst chart, which was produced using Microsoft 365 Excel. For the case study, PubMed® was used by searching for peer-reviewed reports containing "ivermectin" and either "covid" or "sars" in the title. Reports were filtered for those using ivermectin-based protocols in the treatment of COVID-19. The resulting 265 reports were evaluated for their study design types and treatment outcomes. The three-ringed graphical T-EBM wheel was composed of two inner rings showing all types of reports and an outer ring showing outcomes for each type.

Findings-conclusions: The T-EBM wheel avoids the biases of the EBM Pyramid and includes all types of reports in the pyramid along with reports such as population and mechanistic studies. In both early and late stages of medical emergencies, pyramid-based thinking may overlook indications of efficacy in regions of the T-EBM wheel beyond RCTs. This is especially true when searching for ways to prevent and treat a novel disease with repurposed therapeutics before RCTs, safety assessments, and mechanisms of action of novel therapeutics are established. As such, T-EBM Wheels should replace the EBM Pyramids in medical decision-making and education. T-EBM Wheels can be expanded upon by implementing multiple outer rings, one for each different kind of outcome (efficacy, safety, etc.). A T-EBM Wheel can be created for any proprietary or generic medicine. The ivermectin (IVM) T-EBM Wheel displays the efficacy of IVM-based treatments of COVID-19 in a color-coded graphic, visualizing each type of evidence and the proportions of each of their outcomes (positive, inconclusive, negative).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Global Health
Annals of Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: ANNALS OF GLOBAL HEALTH is a peer-reviewed, open access journal focused on global health. The journal’s mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge of global health. Its goals are improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity and promote wise stewardship of the earth’s environment. The journal is published by the Boston College Global Public Health Program. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health.
期刊最新文献
Prioritization of Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anesthesia Care in South and Southeast Asian Countries' Health Planning and Policy‑making: SOTA Care Policies in South and Southeast Asia. Association between Food Insecurity, Socioeconomic Status of the Household Head, and Hypertension and Diabetes in Maputo City. Transforming the Health Research Workforce in Mozambique: Achievements of the Mozambique Institute for Health Education and Research (MIHER) over a 13‑Year Journey. The Global, Regional, and National Burden of Tracheal, Bronchus, and Lung Cancer Caused by Smoking: An Analysis Based on the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Health Impacts of Air Pollution in the Context of Changing Climate in Africa: A Narrative Review with Recommendations for Action.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1